There are even examples where olam (and aionious in the LXX) are applied to the consequences of sin that are temporary according to the immediate context.

Bob, would you mind giving me a reference for this?

Sure Theo... here are some examples...

Isaiah 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; 3 To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified. 4 And they shall build the old wastes, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations.

old = olam, aionion

My interpretation: Why are people in mourning, ashes, brokenhearted, captive, bound, spirit of heaviness? Because of disobedience to God which brings desolation and "everlasting" wastes in the day of God's vengeance. But Jesus came to save people out from these aionion wastes in the "acceptable year of the Lord" i.e. the day of salvation.

Isaiah 58:12 has similar language. Christ and those "of Him" i.e His seed will repair the everlasting wastes. This IMO ties in with Daniel 12:2-3 "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever."

Isaiah 58:11 And the LORD shall guide thee continually, and satisfy thy soul in drought, and make fat thy bones: and thou shalt be like a watered garden, and like a spring of water, whose waters fail not. 12 And they that shall be of thee shall build the old waste places: thou shalt raise up the foundations of many generations; and thou shalt be called, The repairer of the breach, The restorer of paths to dwell in.

old = olam, aionion

One more example

Isaiah 32:12 They shall lament for the teats, for the pleasant fields, for the fruitful vine. 13 Upon the land of my people shall come up thorns [and] briers; yea, upon all the houses of joy in the joyous city: 14 Because the palaces shall be forsaken; the multitude of the city shall be left; the forts and towers shall be for dens for ever, a joy of wild asses, a pasture of flocks; 15 Until the spirit be poured upon us from on high, and the wilderness be a fruitful field, and the fruitful field be counted for a forest.

for ever = olam, unto the aion

BTW... it was not the usual UR proof texts that led me to believe God would save all mankind. It was studying the judgments and wrath of God passages and seeing purpose in God's wrath that did it for me. Things like- Deuteronomy 4 - even in the "last day" a person can repent and God will have mercy. Of those condemned Jesus said, in the last day my word will judge him.- Deuteronomy 28-31 - even when all the curse of the law is upon a person he can still repent and God will have mercy- Daniel 4 - seems to tie in with Christ parables about cutting down the tree and casting into the fire- Ezekiel 16 - Sodom and those worse than Sodom were/will be judged and yet saved- Psalm 107 - the redeemed of the Lord first condemned the Word of God yet are ultimately saved- Deuteronomy 32 - God's wrath/judgment/vengeance upon the vine of Sodom and Gommorah includes God repenting and having compassion when their power is gone i.e. when they are humbled and return to God)- Comparing Isaiah 60 vs Revelation 21 - the gates remain open always (mercy neve ends) for those who turn to the Lord- Lamentations 3 - person sitting under God's wrath for sin will be saved. The Lord will not cast off forever the children of men for sin. The exact opposite of ET and ED doctrines which say that the Lord will cast off the children of men forever for their sin.

God bless.

Thanks Bob.

The problem that remains for me to deal with, is, all the passages in the new covenant that seem to be saying something about eternal punishment, and some say they are all mistranslations. I have been sstudying that issue (mistranslations) for many years, and agree, it happens. But when it come to eternal salvation, I cannot depend upon a "maybe" response. Does that make sense?

If I did not desperately WANT to accept what you guys are saying, I would not spend so much time on this board, I would just settle for what I already think I know. But Instead, I believe there are many issues raised in Christianinty that are contrived, and eternal damnation may well be one of them. But so can USAL. I am not being "turned by every wind of doctrine" here, I am simply trying to get clear answers, without offense to ANYONE, and be given whatever time it takes to assimilate it into my understanding.

I do thank you for your input.

From some of the responses my posts are getting, it might be better to just move on, yet I hesitate because I really do want to know. I just do not want to sit quietly by and aloloow someone to destroy my character with opinions that are expressed that have nothing to do with reality.

Theo Book

With respect WH, I cannot respond at this time because your post deals with some issues that are banned, and without Moderator's approval, I will not deal with it. Specifically, your remark about Abraham in John 8 and "beginnings." It all has to do with trinitarianism doctrine developed in John 1:1.

perhaps later.

Please proceed,

Thank you for being considerate! This site is devoted to the discussion of U.R. The trinity topic is off limits because it distracts from the U.R. focus. Basically it's a hot topic that upsets some! Just try to keep your post from seeming to convert others from one view or another and you will be fine.

Paul

I am rethinking my offer, and do not want to disrupt the proccess you already have. Suppose I post my URL to the moderators, let them look at my post, and decide if it belongs on this board. I realy do not weant to cause a rift in the character of this board. What say you?

Please see my last post directly to you. It's fine to discuss our beliefs and understandings, I just have re-thought the idea of allowing a limited window of "anything goes"...it's what I've suggested before. Discuss the scriptures, staying away from "loaded, hot-button" phrases and terminology that have a history of just enflaming the boards.

Sorry if it's obvious, but I'll still give an example - we could do this; You - "there's freewill". Me - "no there's not freewill" You - "yes there is freewill". Me - no there's not freewill stupid". You - "Yes there is, you idiot".

Or, we could go; You - "I believe we have to make choices". Me - "I do too, what do you think that looks like?". You - "well, this verse says this, so here's how I understand it". Me - "well, that's a good point, but how do you think this scripture fits in there"?

Not asking you to go anywhere, and we're also asking that others post appropriately without personally impugning you or anyone else - that's in process. James.

The problem that remains for me to deal with, is, all the passages in the new covenant that seem to be saying something about eternal punishment, and some say they are all mistranslations. I have been sstudying that issue (mistranslations) for many years, and agree, it happens. But when it come to eternal salvation, I cannot depend upon a "maybe" response. Does that make sense?

If I did not desperately WANT to accept what you guys are saying, I would not spend so much time on this board, I would just settle for what I already think I know. But Instead, I believe there are many issues raised in Christianinty that are contrived, and eternal damnation may well be one of them. But so can USAL. I am not being "turned by every wind of doctrine" here, I am simply trying to get clear answers, without offense to ANYONE, and be given whatever time it takes to assimilate it into my understanding.

I do thank you for your input.

From some of the responses my posts are getting, it might be better to just move on, yet I hesitate because I really do want to know. I just do not want to sit quietly by and aloloow someone to destroy my character with opinions that are expressed that have nothing to do with reality.

What to do...

Hi Theo, I appreciate your post here, it seems you are genuinely seeking and trying to understand what it is we believe.

Perhaps it would be helpful to start a new thread about "eternal/aionios", specifically Matt 25:46 which seems to be one of the main problem verses for you? You've brought it up several times, and people have given you some responses, but you remain unconvinced... it would be good to explore that. I can start a thread later on it if I have a moment (and if you haven't already).

Also, have you considered just sitting down and reading a really good intro to UR? Have you read the book called "Hope beyond Hell"? It is available in PDF format on the main page, right here:

Theo Book

When we take clay and make pots, we do not design in the pots evil uses. When we sell the pots, some men will purchase them and put them to evil use. That eventuallity was not designed into the pots.

God made all the vessels of which he references as "vessels of honour, vessels of dishonour" but he did not put in any of them the propensity for sin. Only the free will ability. And he also included in his creation, the solutions for sin, IN CASE they are needed. THAT was predicated upon the proposition that some men would probably sin, not because God created them TO sin.

Let me address the end of your post here first, as it shows the root of your error. First of all you suggest God makes pots, and then some evil men use the "pots" for evil uses, uses they were not intended for. But Theo, WE are the POTS, and God is using US for His purposes, some which are for honor and some for dishonor. God designed it all.

But God did not say "Look at how I make pots" he said "go to the potter and look..." And I see the potter making pots for use as pots of verious need. The potter did not design good nor ill into the pots. Yet when some of the pots were marred, he did not destroy them, he reused the material. I begin to see USal in this, but want to see what You think.

Quote

Secondly, you say "God did not put in the propensity for sin, only the free will ability"... Come now Theo, if, according to you, we sin because we have free will, then God DID PUT IN the propensity for sin, by the very act of granting us the so-called free will!

Not at all. Wehn I allowed my teenaged children to go to school functions with their school friends, I did not design evil intent into them. NOR did I refust to allow them to go because of a potential that they might have evil intent. I trusted the strength of their training to help them over those moments of temptation. As God does for us. He has given us a moral compass, a moral standard, and a moral example to follow. If we still do evil, it is because we choose to override the compass, and the standard, and ignore the example. We instead, allow our temptations to lead us.

Quote

Thirdly, and here is the real problem, you say God designed a solution for sin "IN CASE" it was needed!?!?! This was done because some men would "probably" sin!?!?!?!?

"IN CASE"? "PROBABLY"?

Now I must ask if you are being serious? Are you saying that God did something just "in case"? Because something "probably" might happen?!? If you are saying that (and it sounds like you are because that is what you wrote), then you are also admitting that you think God is NOT all-knowing and DOES NOT have perfect foreknowledge.

You are saying God didn't know if we would sin or not so He had Jesus ready just "in case" because He thought we would "probably" sin. Essentially God had a "backup plan", a plan B, and His original plan was not perfect and actually went astray. In effect, you are saying God is not really responsible for anything, because HE DIDN'T KNOW IT WOULD HAPPEN! This is absurd & ridiculous.

Sorry you feel that way. What would have happened if Eve sinned, and Adam did not? I do not know, but I believe God had a solution for that eventuallity. And for every other possibility that could happen. He did not design us TO sin, He designed us to be inventive, and responsible, and imitate him. some of us actually accomplish that at some point in our life, and rejoice. Some never do.

Quote

Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

God has already declared everything that will happen - the end from the beginning, including the things that are not yet done. He not only knows the future, He declares what it will be. God's counsel shall be done and He will do his pleasure, which includes His desire and will to save all men (1 Tim 2:4).

THOSE are the premises that are making me rethink my position. If it is compatible with everything else, I must adopt it as my conscience must be solvent in this matter.

Quote

If you continue to believe this nonsense that God didn't know if we would sin or not, then you will not be able to understand and appreciate the truth of UR, nor will you understand God's power in the matter at hand.

Please I hope you really consider your belief here, and how it makes God appear, and how it contrasts with what scripture actually says, being that God IS all-knowing, and IS in control, and WORKS all things according to HIS will.

God has no need for a plan B my friend.

I will continue more in the next post as this is getting too long...

It still contrasts with "Choose you this day whom you will serve, as for me and my house, we will serve jehovah." If God was just teasing them, I begin to have a desparate problem. If he meant it, then YOU begin to have a desperate problem.

It still contrasts with "Choose you this day whom you will serve, as for me and my house, we will serve jehovah." If God was just teasing them, I begin to have a desparate problem. If he meant it, then YOU begin to have a desperate problem.

I've thought about that scripture too. What if it has other possibiliites, such as "yes, we make choices - within the parameters God sets" - i.e., "we plan our way but God directs our steps?" Some things just aren't as black and white as we've often made them. Such as destruction, or judgment. We often add "complete" to destruction [or "that means going to hell"], or "eternal/without remedy" to judgment - when digging deeper and clearer revelation reveals some other aspects. Thinkin' here...

The problem that remains for me to deal with, is, all the passages in the new covenant that seem to be saying something about eternal punishment, and some say they are all mistranslations. I have been sstudying that issue (mistranslations) for many years, and agree, it happens. But when it come to eternal salvation, I cannot depend upon a "maybe" response. Does that make sense?

If I did not desperately WANT to accept what you guys are saying, I would not spend so much time on this board, I would just settle for what I already think I know. But Instead, I believe there are many issues raised in Christianinty that are contrived, and eternal damnation may well be one of them. But so can USAL. I am not being "turned by every wind of doctrine" here, I am simply trying to get clear answers, without offense to ANYONE, and be given whatever time it takes to assimilate it into my understanding.

I do thank you for your input.

From some of the responses my posts are getting, it might be better to just move on, yet I hesitate because I really do want to know. I just do not want to sit quietly by and allow someone to destroy my character with opinions that are expressed that have nothing to do with reality.

What to do...

Hi Theo, I appreciate your post here, it seems you are genuinely seeking and trying to understand what it is we believe.

Perhaps it would be helpful to start a new thread about "eternal/aionios", specifically Matt 25:46 which seems to be one of the main problem verses for you? You've brought it up several times, and people have given you some responses, but you remain unconvinced... it would be good to explore that. I can start a thread later on it if I have a moment (and if you haven't already).

Also, have you considered just sitting down and reading a really good intro to UR? Have you read the book called "Hope beyond Hell"? It is available in PDF format on the main page, right here:

Hello legoman. I just posted my new temporary thread. Read it or delete is as you think best. I will not take issue about it, l as that requires ego issues I do not have; contrary to the opinions of some.

Allow me to tell you how I was introduced to USAL in the first pklace. I had a board, on which I allowed anything to be discussed, and Gary Amirault presented uSAL, whcih we debated. He presented the article by (corrected to) Whittemore, and I responded with rebuttals to every point Thayer (corrected to Whittemore) made. Instead of responding, Amirault took issue with point number four, and accused me of adding words, which to this day remain in Thayer's (corrected to Whittemore's) article. EvenGary could see that the statement was not scriptural. We departed company because I said some very nasty things on my board about his behaviour. THAT was eleven years ago.

Last week I contacted Gary to see if he wanted to discuss the issues again, assuming we had both matured beyond our prior state of disagreemen. He responded with a copy of my previous eleven year old response, and I asked him why he was bearing grudges for so long a time. He denied that was the case. So I came onto the board, thinking he was here. I have not seen his response yet, so maybe I misunderstood.

Anyway,. that was my introduction to USAL.

And my new thread needs evaluation by a moderator.

« Last Edit: March 23, 2010, 04:19:43 PM by Theo Book »

Logged

bobf

The problem that remains for me to deal with, is, all the passages in the new covenant that seem to be saying something about eternal punishment, and some say they are all mistranslations. I have been sstudying that issue (mistranslations) for many years, and agree, it happens. But when it come to eternal salvation, I cannot depend upon a "maybe" response. Does that make sense?

Yes... I understand, because each one of us has had to deal with the same issue and deal with those lingering doubts. We will probably never get a definitive answer about the word aionion because there are now and always will be "scholars" on both sides that disagree. The hard fact though is that olam and aionion are applied to temporary things in scripture. Therefore those words cannot intrinsically impart everlastingness to the noun they modify the way our word "everlasting" does, which could never be applied to something temporary, except by hyperbole (e.g. we've been waiting in line forever). The explanation "beyond the horizon" as given by the Hebrew scholars, is it least consistent with all of scripture, while the definition given in strongs "1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be 2) without beginning 3) without end, never to cease, everlasting" is simply not consistent with many examples in the LXX.

Quote

If I did not desperately WANT to accept what you guys are saying, I would not spend so much time on this board, I would just settle for what I already think I know. But Instead, I believe there are many issues raised in Christianinty that are contrived, and eternal damnation may well be one of them. But so can USAL. I am not being "turned by every wind of doctrine" here, I am simply trying to get clear answers, without offense to ANYONE, and be given whatever time it takes to assimilate it into my understanding.

I would suggest that you just continue to study it and pray about it and take your time. You can't believe something just because you want too or that's not a good idea at least.

Quote

From some of the responses my posts are getting, it might be better to just move on, yet I hesitate because I really do want to know. I just do not want to sit quietly by and aloloow someone to destroy my character with opinions that are expressed that have nothing to do with reality.

What to do...

I wouldn't let that keep you from continuing to discuss here. We have the same issues amongst ourselvees at times. As far as character goes, my view is that a person's character is ultimately revealed by and judged according to his own words, not by the words of anyone else.

Allow me to tell you how I was introduced to USAL in the first pklace. I had a board, on which I allowed anything to be discussed, and Gary Amirault presented uSAL, whcih we debated. He presented the article by Thayer, and I responded with rebuttals to every point Thayer made. Instead of responding, Amirault took issue with point number four, and accused me of adding words, which to this day remain in Thayer's article. EvenGary could see that the statement was not scriptural. We departed company because I said some very nasty things on my board about his behaviour. THAT was eleven years ago.

Last week I contacted Gary to see if he wanted to discuss the issues again, assuming we had both matured beyond our prior state of disagreemen. He responded with a copy of my previous eleven year old response, and I asked him why he was bearing grudges for so long a time. He denied that was the case. So I cam on the board, thinking he was here. I have not seen his response yet, so maybe I misunderstood.

1 Timothy 2:3-4 ...God our Savior; Who will have all men to be saved...John 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

I have prepared a sort of questionaire to Universalists - Answer me please;

... questions 1-6 ...

(legoman) Yes these were all God's will.

Are you serious? Perhaps you read a different translation than I. You really think it was God's will that men sin? Please show me THAT scripture.

If it was not God's will that men sin, then man's will is more powerful than God's.

You ask for the scripture, it has already been given to you, but here they are again:

Romans 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Romans 8:20 For the creature (creation) was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

What is sin but disobedience of God's commands? Yet God binds all men to disobedience. Pride (vanity) is sin. Yet God has subjected all creation (men) to vanity.

Now if sin is simply a product of "free will", why is it that no man in all of history (except one - Christ), has ever used their free will to NOT SIN? Why are all men sinners? No one can choose to NOT be a sinner. If it was not, as you say, God's intention that we sin, and ALSO no one can choose to NOT be a sinner, then who is responsible for us being sinners? Adam? Satan? Are Adam & Satan's will more powerful than God's will?

Quote

You have now contradicted what you said earlier; "Yes, these were all God's will." Now you say "God does not will something to happen that will frustrate his will." Which is it?

There is no contradiction here. Read what I'm saying carefully. God does not will something that frustrates his own will. If He did, that would be contradictory in itself. We are disobedient (remember disobedience is sin) BECAUSE GOD WILLED IT TO BE SO, and bound us over to disobedience.

For right now, that is God's will for the human race. He has subjected the whole creation to VANITY, and bound us to DISOBEDIENCE. God's will is not being frustrated at all because that is what He wants RIGHT NOW. Later on God will DELIVER the creation from this BONDAGE and have MERCY on us all. That is God's will for the creation which will happen to completion sometime in the future, and that will not be frustrated either.

God's will is NOT frustrated.

Quote

Not sure! Brain freeze! I think you got it backwards. We are ALREADY made in the image of God. Adam was made sinless. If your assessment is correct GOD got it backwards. I do not believe that for one moment.

No my friend, you and most of church tradition have it backwards. We are not fully made in the image of God yet. If you look at Gen 1:27 in the original languages, you will see the tense is "is being created" as opposed to "was created" as in:

Gen 1:27 So God [epoieesen] created man in his own image, in the image of God [epoieesen] created he him; male and female created he them. ["epoieesen" is aorist active] "is being created" is present active.

Man is being created in the image of God. RIGHT NOW. And in the future... until God has completed making man in His image.

But according to you and mainstream tradition, man who was in the perfect exact final image of God, SINNED! How ridiculous is that? Think about it. If man is in the perfect express image of God, how can man sin since God does not sin?[/quote]

Are you familiar with Enoch, seventh from Adam? He "pleased God and was not, for God took him, for he pleased God." Enoch was translated, never having died, for the wages of sin is death. It was not ordained that man would sin.

Gen 5:22 "And Enoch walked with God..." (This reminds me of Adam in the beginning)Gen 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

Enoch not only pleased God when he walked with God, he was also a prophet of God:Jude 1:14 "And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,"

It is beginning to seem as though you are correct, however, except for scenes like this one. How is it Enoch never obeyed God and sinned, when scripture says he obeyed God by NOT sinning; and "God is no respecter of persons." Seems confusing to me.

Quote

You show a God who not only creates man TO sin, but even as he creates them TO sin, he tells them to NOT sin. THAT is insanity. God is not insane.

No, believing God doesn't know that man would sin or not is insane. Believing God purposes or allows people to be tormented for ever is insane. You are right that God is not insane though.

Scripture shows that God binds all men to disobedience and subjects us to vanity. God then explains what sin is through His commandments and laws, and shows us how sin is overcome through Jesus and through the commandments of Love. Of course we fail to live up to these laws, GOD KNEW and INTENDED THIS WOULD HAPPEN. We thus experience the utter depths and futility of failure, sin, and evil. This is IMPORTANT for our spiritual growth and understanding. This allows us to learn what NON-LOVE is, so we can eventually fully appreciate and understand what LOVE is. Ultimately we WILL (future tense) be made into the exact express image of God, which is LOVE.

Quote

How can you conclude that for God to give men free will is a mistake? God has free will and we are made in his image. I begin to comprehend how it is Universal Salvation becomes a welcome doctrine among men. It eliminates the guilt of sin by putting the blame all on God for making us sinners to begin with.

I didn't say that. I said if God intended and purposed us NOT to sin, yet here we are sinning, then God made a mistake - a miscalculation, a mis-step; He had to change his plan IN CASE we sinned as YOU suggest. Now since YOU do believe God did NOT intend us to sin, and you stated He needed a backup plan IN CASE we sinned, you yourself have then admitted that God did indeed make the mistake, because his original plan was FOILED by the very "free will" man was given.

Quote

(legoman)

Quote

To do that we have to experience evil. From the CLV:

Eccl 1:13 It is an experience of evil Elohim [God] has given to the sons of humanity to humble them by it

God is giving us an experience of evil. Think about the ramifications of that.

Actually, the quote says - 12 I the Preacher was king over Israel in Jerusalem. 13 And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven: this sore travail hath God given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith. 14 I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit.

"This sore travail" is a reference to his "seeking and searching out by wisdom all things that are done under heaven." "Seeking and searching" are not sin.

"This sore travail" is actually translated from the hebrew word "Ra" which means "EVIL", the same word in the "tree of knowledge of good and evil (Ra)".

The version I quoted was the Concordant Literal Version, which translates word for word:Eccl 1:13 "It is an experience of evil Elohim [God] has given to the sons of humanity to humble them by it" (Concorant Old Testament).

God created evil (Isaiah 45:7) so that we would experience it (Eccl 1:13) so that we would be HUMBLED and LEARN.

(theo)

Quote

22) And If God's will cannot be frustrated, and I preach about a God of vengeance, why do you correct me, and say that my God is a God of hate? It must be God's will that I so teach! And for you to intervene in any way; for you to not aid me in my task, is to go against God's will; which can't be done?

(legoman) "why do you correct me" you say. Why not? Because God has given me a heart to search out the truth and preach the gospel, that's why! Remember God's will does not frustrate His own will. God sets us up in disobedience, puts us through suffering, so He can have mercy on us later, show His glory, and perfect us as sons.

Nope! If all those things in which men sinned was God's will, and I teach truth about it, how then is it I am to be corrected? Am I not already correct, by your understanding of what constitutes God's will? You could NOT correct me, for it was already God's will for me to say those things, and you cannot thwart God's will, according to your comprehension of how things are. [/quote]

Then perhaps God's will for you RIGHT NOW is to oppose the teachings of UR on this tentmaker website, while God's will for me is to defend the teachings of UR here on this same website. This cannot and will not change until God changes one of our hearts and opens our eyes. In effect God's will is for us to FRUSTRATE each other! Yet God's will is not frustrated in this, because that is what He intended!

Perhaps we should pray that God will bring our two wills into agreement? God - who is the savior of all men, and who will have all men to be saved - how should He finally resolve our apparent conflict, which He has intended to happen, so that we would both LEARN? God will eventually bring us all to our knees, and we will all bow in agreement JOYFULLY PRAISING that He is Lord and Savior of all! Scripture declares it.

Quote

Again, you missed the condition in which Adam was placed in the garden. He was not created in sin, a sinner. He was created innocent UNTIL he sinned. THAT constituted the first "change of heart" resulting in rebellion against God. YOU HAVE EVERYTHING BACKWARDS.

Adam was a SINNER from the beginning, just like the rest of us. Adam did not have a choice to NOT be a sinner, for He was always intended to eat of the forbidden fruit. God was not rolling dice and waiting to see if Adam was a sinner or not, while holding Jesus in reserve "IN CASE" Adam "probably" would sin!

God KNEW how it would all go down, God INTENDED it, because God had already prepared the lamb of God BEFORE any human was ever created. God has bound all men to disobedience (this includes Adam). And He will have mercy on all men. [/quote]

I see a certain pattern of sense in your presentation, which I will have to contemploate on for a bit. I have to evaluate what I know with what you have presented, and see if it meshes in truth. I will probably look over some more posts in the meantime, though I may not respond for a while, as I think on these things.